For NOYB Only -
 

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 12:35:20 +0000, NOYB wrote:


He's not alone. Cheney looks probable.

You guys never quit wishing. What the heck could he charge Cheney with?
Not perjury. Cheney didn't testify. And since Fitzgerald has admitted
that there was no crime committed in the 'outing' of Plame, what could the
charge be? Being Republican?

Uh, your sources must be better informed than mine. I hadn't heard that
Fitzgerald admitted there was no crime in the outing of Plame. I have
heard that there is a very good chance Cheney will be indicted on
conspiracy charges. Other potential charges include leaking of classified
material, and civil rights charges, vis a vis damaging Wilson's career.

For NOYB Only -
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 12:35:20 +0000, NOYB wrote:


He's not alone. Cheney looks probable.

You guys never quit wishing. What the heck could he charge Cheney with?
Not perjury. Cheney didn't testify. And since Fitzgerald has admitted
that there was no crime committed in the 'outing' of Plame, what could
the
charge be? Being Republican?

Uh, your sources must be better informed than mine. I hadn't heard that
Fitzgerald admitted there was no crime in the outing of Plame.

You're the master of google. He's admitted as such. Go look for it.


I have
heard that there is a very good chance Cheney will be indicted on
conspiracy charges. Other potential charges include leaking of classified
material,


The "leaking" wasn't a leak if it comes at the directive of the POTUS. And
Libby's attorneys already said that the directive to release the info came
from "the top".


and civil rights charges, vis a vis damaging Wilson's career.


Wilson's career? What, precisely, was "Wilson' career" at the time that his
wife arranged for him to go to Niger?

Wilson lied to the news media when he said that Cheney's office sent him.
If his career was "damaged", it was damaged by his own transgressions.

For NOYB Only -
 

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 18:57:36 +0000, NOYB wrote:


The "leaking" wasn't a leak if it comes at the directive of the POTUS.
And Libby's attorneys already said that the directive to release the info
came from "the top".

Geez, who are we to believe? Libby's attorneys or the President?

"I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified
information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know
it, and we'll take the appropriate action." [Bush Remarks: Chicago,
Illinois, 9/30/03]

For NOYB Only -
 

thunder wrote:
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 12:35:20 +0000, NOYB wrote:


He's not alone. Cheney looks probable.
You guys never quit wishing. What the heck could he charge Cheney with?
Not perjury. Cheney didn't testify. And since Fitzgerald has admitted
that there was no crime committed in the 'outing' of Plame, what could the
charge be? Being Republican?

Uh, your sources must be better informed than mine. I hadn't heard that
Fitzgerald admitted there was no crime in the outing of Plame. I have
heard that there is a very good chance Cheney will be indicted on
conspiracy charges. Other potential charges include leaking of classified
material, and civil rights charges, vis a vis damaging Wilson's career.

What Conspiracy?

For NOYB Only -
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
thunder wrote:
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 18:57:36 +0000, NOYB wrote:


The "leaking" wasn't a leak if it comes at the directive of the POTUS.
And Libby's attorneys already said that the directive to release the
info
came from "the top".

Geez, who are we to believe? Libby's attorneys or the President? "I
don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified
information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to
know
it, and we'll take the appropriate action." [Bush Remarks: Chicago,
Illinois, 9/30/03]


Bush has shot his entire wad of credibility. No one should believes a word
he says about anything.

Oh, the dear boy is down another point on Rasmussen's poll, to another
"lowest point ever."

Today, Rasmussen addressed the issue of weighting data by political party.
Rather than use decade old data that assumes 40% of the electorate is
Democrat, and 32% is Republican, Rasmussen sets his partisan affiliation
weighting on three months of survey results:



Sunday April 30, 2006--Thirty-eight percent (38%) of Americans now approve
of the way George W. Bush is performing his job as President. Sixty-one
percent (61%) disapprove.
One of the major methodological disputes among public opinion pollsters
involves weighting data by Political Party. All agree that partisan
affiliation is one of the best indicators of voting intentions and
perceptions of the President. However, some firms and academic researchers
believe that party affiliation changes on a regular basis. At Rasmussen
Reports, we do not. We, along with many others, believe party affiliation is
generally stable and that people switch their allegiance only rarely.

This view is supported by data and by common sense --how many people do you
know that switch political parties on a regular basis?

The challenge for a polling firm is determining the proper partisan mix for
a polling sample. What percentage of Americans are Republican, Democrat, or
unaffiliated? What are the "right" numbers?

Beginning today (Sunday), Rasmussen Reports Job Approval updates are based
upon data using a slight modification to our targeting and weighting
process. From this point forward, we will set our partisan affiliation
weighting targets based upon survey results obtained during the previous
three months. These shift only modestly month-to-month, but the change could
be significant over a long period of time.

Based upon the past three months, the current targets are 36.6% Democrat,
33.5% Republican, and 29.9% Unaffiliated. These targets will be updated
monthly. Previously, our weighting targets assumed an equal number of
Republicans and Democrats.

We have adopted this system because we believe it allows us to maintain the
day-to-day stability needed to follow trends while adjusting periodically
for any substantive shifts in partisan affiliation (see trends in party
affiliation).

The practical impact of this revision is modest in the current environment.
The new approach will result in the President's reported ratings being a
point or two lower than they would have been under the old system. Today's
reading would have been 39% using the old approach.

Data in the table to the right shows month-by-month Job Approval averages
using the new weighting methodology. Each month's number is based upon
interviews with approximately 15,000 American adults. The full month average
for April will be released tomorrow (Monday). At that time, we will also
update our month-by-month summary of shifting party affiliation among the
general public.

By way of comparison, the President's decline in support among Republicans
over the past two months has had a much bigger impact on his overall ratings
than our procedural change. If the President had retained consistent support
from his own party over the past few months, his Approval ratings would
still be in the mid-forties.

For NOYB Only -
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
thunder wrote:
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 18:57:36 +0000, NOYB wrote:


The "leaking" wasn't a leak if it comes at the directive of the POTUS.
And Libby's attorneys already said that the directive to release the
info
came from "the top".
Geez, who are we to believe? Libby's attorneys or the President? "I
don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified
information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to
know
it, and we'll take the appropriate action." [Bush Remarks: Chicago,
Illinois, 9/30/03]

Bush has shot his entire wad of credibility. No one should believes a
word he says about anything.

Oh, the dear boy is down another point on Rasmussen's poll, to another
"lowest point ever."

Today, Rasmussen addressed the issue of weighting data by political
party. Rather than use decade old data that assumes 40% of the electorate
is Democrat, and 32% is Republican, Rasmussen sets his partisan
affiliation weighting on three months of survey results:



Sunday April 30, 2006--Thirty-eight percent (38%) of Americans now
approve of the way George W. Bush is performing his job as President.
Sixty-one percent (61%) disapprove.
One of the major methodological disputes among public opinion pollsters
involves weighting data by Political Party. All agree that partisan
affiliation is one of the best indicators of voting intentions and
perceptions of the President. However, some firms and academic
researchers believe that party affiliation changes on a regular basis. At
Rasmussen Reports, we do not. We, along with many others, believe party
affiliation is generally stable and that people switch their allegiance
only rarely.

This view is supported by data and by common sense --how many people do
you know that switch political parties on a regular basis?

The challenge for a polling firm is determining the proper partisan mix
for a polling sample. What percentage of Americans are Republican,
Democrat, or unaffiliated? What are the "right" numbers?

Beginning today (Sunday), Rasmussen Reports Job Approval updates are
based upon data using a slight modification to our targeting and
weighting process. From this point forward, we will set our partisan
affiliation weighting targets based upon survey results obtained during
the previous three months. These shift only modestly month-to-month, but
the change could be significant over a long period of time.

Based upon the past three months, the current targets are 36.6% Democrat,
33.5% Republican, and 29.9% Unaffiliated. These targets will be updated
monthly. Previously, our weighting targets assumed an equal number of
Republicans and Democrats.

We have adopted this system because we believe it allows us to maintain
the day-to-day stability needed to follow trends while adjusting
periodically for any substantive shifts in partisan affiliation (see
trends in party affiliation).

The practical impact of this revision is modest in the current
environment. The new approach will result in the President's reported
ratings being a point or two lower than they would have been under the
old system. Today's reading would have been 39% using the old approach.

Data in the table to the right shows month-by-month Job Approval averages
using the new weighting methodology. Each month's number is based upon
interviews with approximately 15,000 American adults. The full month
average for April will be released tomorrow (Monday). At that time, we
will also update our month-by-month summary of shifting party affiliation
among the general public.

By way of comparison, the President's decline in support among
Republicans over the past two months has had a much bigger impact on his
overall ratings than our procedural change. If the President had retained
consistent support from his own party over the past few months, his
Approval ratings would still be in the mid-forties.




Ahhh, so no matter how Rasmussen shuffles the deck to favor Bush, his loss
of support would still leave him in the dumpster. Good. That's where he
belongs.

You're nuts if you think for a moment that Bush's approval rating among
Republicans will remain in the mid-60's come election day. Many Republicans
are mad at his stance on immigration, but they're not stupid. They know
that the worst thing that could happen to this country is the chance that
Democrats could be in charge again...and they won't let it happen.

By election day, Bush will have 80% (or better) approval among
Republicans...and approximately 50% approval overall.